When Joe added these types I assumed that he used the unconventional prototypes for hton128() and ntoh128() because the return value convention was inefficient. If GCC and Clang actually optimize the use of a return value in some kind of sensible way then I agree that the usual convention is nicer.
Joe, did you have another reason? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
